About your Search

20121221
20121221
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
by sandy renwau, and yee fong. >> good afternoon, ms. woods. >>> good afternoon, commissioners. i've been living in north beach since 1962. i've continuously used the central subway, but we lost that one. i am just stupefied by some of the lies. i can't believe option 2 was not the favored choice. director rifkin, you were there, i'm sure you remember this rather clearly. we were not notified about this meeting and that these options were going to be presented to you until november 30th. i understand not everybody was notified by mr. funge if these options were going to be put before you. but anyway, i was. and then i've been back and forth with him three or four times about why option 2 didn't appear on the agenda. and the last thing i heard from him was, he thanked me this was the first. thank you for your comments regarding option 2. we'll be presenting all options to our board of -- on december the first. i don't see option 2 anyplace in your agenda. the decision on which option to move forward is now with our board. i was at the meeting all three hours of it and option 2 was clearly
cards to start with, richard fong and then paul manning. there were cards on the table. if not,, if you just want to get in line as we have two cards. richard, come on up. >> good morning, commissioners, commissioner fong speaking again, i had the pleasure of attending the palace of fine art community meeting on the 12th and i thought they were going to do pretty good work, so in retrospect, i look at it and i don't quite agree with the layout, so i don't know what that's going to do, so through the chair, commissioner, allan low, i think you're on the committee as such, i would like to see if i can bring in some recommendations that might enhance the development. we had a list of different people, jan was there, she's the executive director, there was a lot of people there, very high dignitary people, even jim lazarus was there, when i took a look at what they had planned out, they had architects where the explore tor yum is going to leave, so the planning that would be looked at, they want to open up the middle of that building, it's like a part of a hanger, so they were thinking abou
cards. [ reading speakers' names ] >> good evening president fong and commissioners, my name is christine -- i am an attorney in san francisco and i am spoking on behalf of mr. and mrs. flavia, who are at 1870 pacific avenue unit 505, which is the property directly being affected by the project and also speaking on behalf of mr. bernard, who is at 1830 jackson street, who is not here tonight, and has not had an opportunity to send a letter and both partis are objecting to this project. i have some procedural objections to this. my office received the conditional use application this past monday, even though we had asked for it and therefore we had not had enough time to make a presentation in detail about what are the different reasons we object to it? i have been asked specifically to also voice his objections in that he apparently did not receive this notice of this application until just recently and was not able to attend tonight. now i am also informed that the sponsor and/or his architect never had a pre-approval meeting with the pacific heights association to get t
was not supportive of commissioners. >> yes. president fong, members of the commission. my name is bruce prescott and i represent the discretionary review requester, lawrence rambling. this case was initially set to be on hearing on the november 15th hearing as a result of a procedural error, apparently, it had to be continued. at that time, the requester himself, there rambling had a commitment today he could not rearrange. i had requested that we had the hearing on a different date and apparently because of the 90-day policy there was no alternative for doing that. i think it's important that mr. rambling is here. he is the requester and i would ask for a continuance for that because he cannot appear. it has come to my attention this afternoon that apparently the neighbors yesterday, while trying to find if there were other neighbors who mountaining be able to attend today learned from one of them that there is apparently an underground stream that runs under this project. leading us to believe there might be some environmental impacts that have not been addressed and i think a continuance woul
. thank you >> thank you. project sponsor you have a 2-minute rebuttal. >> >> thank you. president fong and commissioners, i will be very brief. objective third party planning department has looked into this and they don't see anyway extraordinary privacy issues. they spent their time looking at the drawings and they did not see those privacy issues that the dr requester is mentioning. with regarding to the solar panels, they weren't there -- they added them after we proposed the project. and didn't take into consideration the project regardless at our own expense, at the request of the dr requester, we did a solar study. the reason why you are not hearing mention of the solar study because it clearly shows that it doesn't shade their panels, regardless of the fact that they used them as leverage against us to say we don't want this. and finally with regards to the stairs looking in, it would be remarkable to be able to look into a slanted bay window with the stairs. these are issues beg brought up now. there was six months of silence from the dr requester where we continually asked th
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)